F27

Responsibility for regulating and monitoring compliance

Mid Staffs Inquiry · Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry · Issued 6 February 2013 · Addressed to: CQC

Government responseDepartment of Health and Social Care: Accepted (Nov 2013)

DeliveryDHSC and NHS England say in progress (Feb 2026)Department of Health and Social Care says in progress (Feb 2015)

Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry

●Inquiry recommendation

The healthcare systems regulator should promote effective enforcement by: use of a low threshold of suspicion; no tolerance of non-compliance with fundamental standards; and allowing no place for favourable assumptions, unless there is evidence showing that suspicions are ill-founded or that deficiencies have been remedied. It requires a focus on identifying what is wrong, not on praising what is right.

Mid Staffs Inquiry, Report of the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry · 6 Feb 2013 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

AI-generated evidence summary

In commentary published in February 2026, the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England stated that the Care Quality Commission makes enforcement decisions in accordance with its published enforcement policy and decision tree, while also having regard to the Code for Crown Prosecutors for any prosecutions (DHSC and NHS England, Feb 2026). Previously, the Thirlwall Inquiry legal team found in May 2024 that although regulations made certain breaches prosecutable without prior warning notices, the government had not explicitly stated what threshold would be used or whether and how a no-tolerance approach would be adopted (The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team, May 2024).

AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 26 Sep 2026.

About this summary
This recommendation applies across many organisations. The record above reflects central policy activity; adoption in individual organisations may vary.

Report-level response context

Government responded via "Hard Truths: The Journey to Putting Patients First" (2014), a single document covering all 290 recommendations with a blanket acceptance. Individual recommendation responses were not broken out.

Government response

●Department of Health and Social Care · Accepted · 19 Nov 2013

Speaker not recorded. Source: Department of Health, Hard Truths: the Journey to Putting Patients First, volume 2 (Cm 8777-II), November 2013

Accepted.
The Care Quality Commission’s new approach to inspection includes clearly recognising and encouraging high quality care through ratings which will highlight outstanding practice. But where it identifies concerns, the Care Quality Commission will also have the ability to act swiftly and firmly on it.
The Department of Health will consult shortly on new regulations which will make clearer the fundamental standards of care, and enable enforcement against them without a prior warning notice. Subject to Parliamentary approval, the regulations will come into force during 2014. The Care Quality Commission will consult on a new enforcement policy for all sectors, making clear how any breach of the fundamental standards of care will be acted upon, so that these new regulations can be enforced effectively as they come into effect. Through its policies, the Care Quality Commission will ensure its actions are as transparent and understandable to the public as possible, and that information is made available about providers subject to enforcement.
For NHS Trusts and NHS Foundation Trusts there is a single failure regime to ensure that the various means of holding NHS providers to account for failures of finance or governance are equally available for failures of quality. It ensures that the Chief Inspector of Hospitals’ concerns trigger action by commissioners, the NHS Trust Development Authority or Monitor, rather than the Care Quality Commission acting alone. The action triggered includes credible strong sanctions, such as a managed process for placing a provider into administration and reconfiguring its services.
While this new approach to effective action in the NHS has already started, it will be further underpinned by legislation upon adoption of the Care Bill, currently before Parliament. The new legislation will strengthen the current administrative arrangements and give a statutory basis for the means by which, through the Chief Inspector, the Care Quality Commission refers a Foundation Trust to Monitor for intervention.

Extract from: Hard Truths: The Journey to Putting Patients First. Volume Two of the Government Response to the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Inquiry: Response to the Inquiry's Recommendations

Site note: This is volume two of "Hard Truths: The Journey to Putting Patients First" (Cm 8777-II), the government's response to the Inquiry's 290 recommendations, published by the Department of Health on GOV.UK on 19 November 2013 and dated to that day here. The PDF the row links to is the accessible edition, whose title page reads "January 2014". The Department of Health has been the Department of Health and Social Care since January 2018. The volume says it includes accounts from each of the national organisations the recommendations name, but it does not mark which passage each organisation wrote, so every row is filed under the Department that published it.

Delivery

●DHSC and NHS England say in progress · 27 Feb 2026

The CQC’s enforcement policy sets out the principles and approach the CQC will take when using their enforcement powers under the Health and Social Care Act 2008, as amended by the Care Act 2014.

With regards to low threshold of suspicion, any decision to take enforcement action must be made in accordance with the CQC's published enforcement policy and associated enforcement decision tree. For any prosecutions CQC also has regard for the two-stage test for crown prosecutors set out under the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

From: The Thirlwall Inquiry: Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025)

Site note: DHSC and NHS England's own account of progress, supplied to the Thirlwall Inquiry in September 2024 and printed in the Inquiry legal team's Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version dated April 2025, published 27 February 2026). It is not a finding of the Inquiry. Their reviewed extent of implementation reads “Implemented - Ongoing”. Table row: section 18.2 No. 27, PDF page 437-438.

●Department of Health and Social Care says in progress · 11 Feb 2015

New Fundamental Standards regulations come into force for all providers of health and social care in April 2015. The Care Act 2014, which received Royal Assent in May 2014, created an additional form of warning notice specifically for NHS trusts and foundation trusts, which the Care Quality Commission can issue when it judges that a trust requires significant improvement. This warning notice can lead to the provider entering the failure regime and is intended to come into force at the same time as the fundamental standards are introduced.

Special measures will apply to NHS trusts and foundation trusts that have serious failures in quality of care and where there are concerns that existing leadership cannot make the necessary improvements without support. NHS trusts are put into special measures by the NHS Trust Development Authority while foundations trusts will be put into special measures by Monitor.

Generally, this happens following a recommendation by Professor Sir Mike Richards, Chief Inspector of Hospitals. In May 2014, the Care Quality Commission, Monitor and the NHS Trust Development Authority published joint guidance on how the special measures programme works for NHS trusts and Foundation Trusts. The guidance explains why a trust would be placed in special measures, what happens during the special measures period, the roles and responsibilities of the Trust, the Care Quality Commission, Monitor and the NHS Trust Development Authority, and how trusts exit special measures.

From: Culture Change in the NHS supporting Annex (annex to Culture change in the NHS: applying the lessons of the Francis Inquiries)

Site note: This is the supporting annex published on 11 February 2015 with "Culture change in the NHS: applying the lessons of the Francis Inquiries" (Cm 9009), attached to the GOV.UK page as "Culture change in the NHS supporting annex". The annex has no title page; that title is GOV.UK's and the PDF's own. Its table has four columns (No., Recommendation, Hard Truths Government response, Progress update), and the row carries the Progress update cell. No column says which organisation wrote an update, so the row is filed under the Department of Health (now the Department of Health and Social Care), which published it.

Site note: The Inquiry addressed this recommendation to the Care Quality Commission, not to the Department of Health. The annex gives this update in the Department's publication and does not say who wrote it, so the row is the Department's report of the progress made on it.

What other bodies have found

In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.

●Thirlwall Inquiry legal team · 15 May 2024

This recommendation was accepted by the Government.

Breaches of regs. 11, 16(3), 17(3), 20(2)(a), 20(3) and 20A of the Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 were made prosecutable without the need for a warning notice or harm.

In the February 2015 Culture Change report, the Government referred to the Care Act 2014 as creating an additional form of warning notice which the Care Quality Commission could issue when it judged a trust required significant improvement.

The Government did not explicitly state what threshold would be used and whether a no-tolerance approach would be adopted nor how.

From: The Thirlwall Inquiry: Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version of 15 May 2024)

Site note: The Thirlwall Inquiry legal team's own notes on implementation, from its Review of Implementation of Recommendations from Previous Inquiries into Healthcare Issues (version of 15 May 2024). The review does not colour its Extent of Implementation cell for this recommendation green; it leaves the cell uncoloured where a recommendation was rejected, where evidence of implementation was insufficient, or where steps had been taken but implementation was not yet complete. Table row: section 16.2 No. 27, PDF page 399.

How this page is built

The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.